Most Kills
-
-
The North Korean numbers are laughable.
-
@george-k said in Most Kills:
@copper said in Most Kills:
And I took a picture of GK standing in front of his airplane
I'd like to see that.
I always took a picture of whoever I was with when we walked past the Enola Gay, at least I think I did.
I'm sure we walked past that plane and looked into the cockpit, I'm pretty sure I took the picture. Didn't I?
-
@mik said in Most Kills:
that chart really shows the material destruction that was WWII.
Indeed... WWI (and even moreso WWII with the advances in weapons/planes) came at a unique time where we had bigger and more deadly weapons while still having multi-country conflicts where "killing more soldiers than the other side kills yours" is basically what determined the winner.
Now with tech, drones, economic impacts, and international organizations... seeing that much destruction and carnage only comes from natural disasters (tsunamis, pandemics, etc).
-
@89th said in Most Kills:
@mik said in Most Kills:
that chart really shows the material destruction that was WWII.
Now with tech, drones, economic impacts, and international organizations... seeing that much destruction and carnage only comes from natural disasters (tsunamis, pandemics, etc).
One wonders about what a battle would look like fighting a country like China. They could use a mass of mini-drones to attack any infantry position or armored column for that matter. The face of war will be very different next time around. AND even little countries could do this on a smaller scale - i.e. explosive device attached to a do-it-yourself drone could take out a sniper position or a command headquarters. Terrorism in the next round will also be different - no need for a suicide bomber if you can send the explosives over with a remote control drone bought off the internet.
Maybe TNCR should do a 365 a day calendar of "things to think about to keep you up at night..."
-
@kluurs If there was a full blown war between US and China (which I think would never happen based on international/economic pressure), you are right, it would be flush with drones, heck even satellite-based warfare, and hopefully the avoidance of nukes.
-
@mik said in Most Kills:
A couple things - first, that chart really shows the material destruction that was WWII.
Second - the Finns must have been desperate. Would you go to war in a Fiat fighter plane?
Finns used any and all aircraft they could get their hands on- German, British, Soviet and apparently, Italian. Not sure if they had any US aircraft. I doubt it. I know the Brits shipped them a number of Hurricanes and they captured quite a few Soviet aircraft. Germans supplied some after June 1941.
-
@renauda said in Most Kills:
@mik said in Most Kills:
A couple things - first, that chart really shows the material destruction that was WWII.
Second - the Finns must have been desperate. Would you go to war in a Fiat fighter plane?
Finns used any and all aircraft they could get their hands on- German, British, Soviet and apparently, Italian. Not sure if they had any US aircraft. I doubt it. I know the Brits shipped them a number of Hurricanes and they captured quite a few Soviet aircraft. Germans supplied some after June 1941.
I think he's got four or so follow-ons, but you get the gist...
-
I stand corrected. I had forgotten about the Brewster Buffalos entirely. Pretty sure that the Soviets had a few early on after June ‘41. I think the Brits transhipped them to the Russians as the RAF found them unsuitable to the high altitude war it was engaged with the Nazis. In any case the Russians much preferred the P 39 Airacobra supplied through Lend Lease. The US supplied close to 5000 of them to the USSR.
-
How about the American plane the Soviets had significant input for design mods?